1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to carrying cases, and more specifically to wallet-sized electromagnetic-shielding carrying cases for holding personal articles such as credit cards, contactless smartcards, licenses, identification cards, paper currency, receipts, tickets, and the like.
2. Prior Art
Contactless smartcards are credit card sized cards that are being marketed to consumers as an alternative to magnetic strip cards as a convenient way for storing financial and personal data. By virtue of their ability to store relatively large amounts of data on an embedded microchip, and the convenience of not having to swipe the card through a scanner or hand it to a cashier, it is projected that these cards will only continue to multiply in the coming years in the fields of banking, transportation, healthcare, insurance, social security, and other personal data. The chips used in contactless smartcards can be manufactured in a form called an RFID chip. The acronym RFID stands for Radio Frequency Identification. Contactless smartcards may also be referred to as RFID enabled cards.
In order to obtain the personal information contained on a smartcard, an RFID reader or sensor needs to be present. The RFID reader provides power to the embedded microchip via a modulated magnetic field, allowing the information to be obtained from the card. Assuming that the smartcards are not shielded by an electromagnetic-shielding enclosure, the smartcards can be powered up and accessed without the card owner's knowledge. This can typically occur in two different scenarios. In one scenario, the unauthorized scanning of an RFID enabled card can be accidental, wherein the card owner is unaware that they have come within range of an active RFID reader. In the second scenario, the scanning of the card might be intentionally executed by a party who is interested in obtaining the card owners personal information without their consent. This said party may have an RFID reader of their own which they use for this purpose. The latter scenario is an example of what has become known as RFID theft. In both of these scenarios, however, the user can no longer take a proactive role in securing information on their cards.
There are some who have invented methods of proactively securing the information on a smartcard. U.S. Pat. No. 6,121,544 issued to Petsinger describes an electromagnetic shield to prevent unauthorized access to contactless smartcards. The smartcard is inserted into a sleeve that covers the majority of the cards surfaces. A sheet of electromagnetic-shielding material in the form of a soft magnetic alloy is embedded within the sleeve. While in the sleeve, a contactless smartcard is shielded from being powered up by an RFID reader. The disadvantage of this device is that it is specifically made for a very small quantity of cards (typically one or two). The sleeve is meant to be carried in a users pocket or wallet, but this is unfavorable because it adds complication to removing cards from a users wallet. Moreover, because of the typically opaque nature of the electromagnetic-shielding material, one cannot see through it. This prevents the user from seeing which card is stored inside the sleeve. Lastly, the sleeve does not have the capability to carry any additional personal items, such as paper currency, photographs, receipts, or several other cards.
Other solutions have been presented for shielding smartcards in the form of conventional leather and fabric wallets with one or more layers of electromagnetic-shielding material embedded somewhere within them. Two companies that are using this approach are Kena Kai (www.Kenakai.com) DataSafe® wallets and DIFR WEAR (www.DIFRwear.com) wallets. Both of these companies claim to have patents pending. The shielding material in these wallets is concealed within the planar layers of leather or soft fabric material so that when the wallet is closed, the layers of material form an electromagnetic shield around the cards within.
There are several problems with this solution. First, these wallets are made to be carried in ones pocket or handbag, but while these traditional bi-fold type wallets are in ones pocket or handbag they have a tendency to pivot open slightly as a result of the user walking, running, or being jolted. When these wallets open even the slightest bit, a breach is created in the RFID shielding effect of the wallet, and the smartcards are prone to accidental or unauthorized scanning.
A second disadvantage of these RFID blocking wallets is the fact that the card pockets within them are typically not closed off in any way, even when the wallet is folded closed. Again, as a result of the user walking, running, or being jolted in some way, the smartcards within the wallet are prone to sliding out of the sleeves, and even the slightest exposure of these cards outside of the electromagnetic-shielding material can risk unauthorized and accidental reading of the smartcard.
Several of the designs of the RFID blocking wallet company Kena Kai, mentioned above, feature flaps with shielding material embedded within them that fold over the card sleeves, in addition to shielding material within the exterior panels. Some of these designs also feature a zipper along the edges of the wallet to keep the wallet shut. While this may be a more secure RFID blocking wallet, since it prevents the exterior panels from pivoting open, it becomes an added hassle for the user to unzip the wallet and fold open the interior flaps, which have a tendency to stay shut due to the often resilient nature of the thick wallet material. Moreover, the card sleeves are often deep in these wallets, making it difficult for the user to slidably remove one card with their fingers. In addition, the faces of the cards are often substantially covered by the opaque sleeves, making it difficult to see which card is in what sleeve, especially in dimly lit environments or for people with poor vision.
Another disadvantage to these RFID blocking wallets is the added labor and cost of manufacturing and constructing them. Not only does the leather or durable fabric have to be cut down to size and sewn together, but sheets of electromagnetic-shielding material have to be fabricated and cut down to size as well. It is an added cost and an added step in the manufacturing process that is often reflected in the retail price for these wallets.
Another disadvantage is that the shielding material inside these fabric wallets is often substantially thin, flimsy, and prone to bending, deforming or breaking with normal wear and use, which could lead to creation of a hole or gap in the shielding material, consequently creating a breach in the electromagnetic shielding effect of the wallet.
Hence, there exists a need for an electromagnetic-shielding wallet or case that holds a plurality of smartcards in more than one sleeve or pocket and allows better visibility of those cards while they are contained in a pocket. Also, the electromagnetic shielding carrying case must not accidentally pivot or fold open while in ones pocket, which would create a breach in the electromagnetic shielding effect. In addition to being able to hold a plurality of smartcards or regular wallet-size cards, the carrying case must also be able to hold paper currency, receipts, tickets, and the like. Moreover, the electromagnetic shielding carrying case or wallet must be able to quickly and easily lock shut and pivot open without the hassle of using zippers or interior flaps. Lastly, the materials used to create the electromagnetic shielding wallet or case must be substantially rigid, durable, and resilient so as to protect the interior electromagnetic shielding material from being bent or broken over time with use.